• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Answers 3 answers
  • Subscribers 63 subscribers
  • Views 312 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

BQ34Z100-G1: bq34z100-G1 and GPCRB tool issue

Jean Eddim
Prodigy 100 points
Part Number: BQ34Z100-G1
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: GPCRB, BQSTUDIO,

Dear all,

We have succesfully finished the learning process for a Lifepo4 battery. Now, for negative temperature optimization, we use the GPCRB tool. 

But there is an issue. We followed the SLUUBD0 document. 

The report says:

The following errors were reported by the calculation engine:
Error: negative room temperature resistance observed R=-0.00797221581715452 usually caused by wrong chem ID selection
Error: negative Ra R=-37.96 check data and ID selection

We use a custom ID, so this cannot be the issue.

Please indicate how to solve this issue. Is it there a way to test if submitted log files are correct? And how we can test if chemid is correct? Please explain this process. Thanks

Attached you can find both zip files

TempTweak_Upload_3.zip            TempTweak_Upload_3-report.zip

  • 0
    TI__Guru** 105770 points

    Hello Jean,

    I took a look at your data, it looks like it probably calculated a negative value since the chem ID you're using only has OCV points up to 3357mV and you start discharge at a higher voltage. You may not be leaving the battery to relax long enough before starting the discharge. LFP chemistry requires much longer relaxation periods.

    In your logs it looks like you do a CV charge at 3610mV and then taper, but after the relaxation the voltage is still well above the chem ID range of 3357mV, and if you look in the output file the only negative is the first Ra value which is another indicator this might be the root cause.

    Sincerely,

    Wyatt Keller

  • 0 in reply to Wyatt Keller
    Prodigy 100 points

    Hello,

    You are right. To solve this issue, I removed 8 log lines when discharge is starting. I calculated 3357x8 = 26400. Removed all line with voltage at discharge higher than 26400mv. Now all Ra are positive

    But I still have another problem. In the report it says:

    Due to GG file format issues, GG values have not been updated . 

    And there is not a new chemid in the report

    I changed the format of gg file in order to be correct, but still it says there is a format issue. Can you check it please? 

    Also in old zip files, the number of parameters in gg file have a slight difference (added two and removed 3 parameters). This can be an issue?

    Upload_new.zip

  • 0 in reply to Jean Eddim
    TI__Guru** 105770 points

    Hello Jean,

    Yes this appears to be the issue then. You would need to charge to a slightly lower voltage, so the relaxed cell voltage is below the chem ID max voltage.

    The .gg file you submit should be the same one you exported from the gauge without external modifications, otherwise it could change the formatting of the .gg file and lead to the tool reporting errors.

    Sincerely,

    Wyatt Keller

  • 0 in reply to Wyatt Keller
    Prodigy 100 points

    Hello again,

    I still have the problem of not getting the updated flash parameters and updated Chemid after following the GPCRB optimization tool.

    I "Export to file" the Data Memory, and without any change, included the gg file to the zip (new11), and uploaded to to the tool.

    But the answered zip file does not contain neither  the new chemid nor new gg file. Can you please check it the reason?. We use a custom chemid

    Regards

    PD: I checked uploading another zip (new4), with the same chemid, but different flash parameters, different logs and it worked ok (with an old flash configuration). Attached you can find both zip files

    I use the BqStudio 1.3.86

    OK-Upload_new4.zip          FAIL-Upload_new11.zip

  • 0 in reply to Jean Eddim
    TI__Guru** 105770 points

    Hello Jean,

    Please share the report along with the data submitted so we can review both.

    I submitted the data and also see the same thing, there is a warning as well in the GPC_report.txt file indicating there may be an issue with the .gg file. I did a diff on your .gg files and there are many differences. It looks like you have some open parameters that may be interfering with the tool.

    Try using the default BQZ file when you export the .gg file so there are no hidden parameters that will cause issues.

    Sincerely,

    Wyatt Keller

  • 0 in reply to Wyatt Keller
    Prodigy 100 points

    Hello, Wyatt

    Thank you for your prompt answer,

    Attached you can find both zip files (sent and received). You can see there the missing chemid and gg.csv_out files in the report

    I have some questions related to that:

    1) R_a0 and R_a0x tables must have the same, or similar resistance values?. In the gg file they haven´t

    2) What is the correct value for R_a0 and R_a0x flags (0055 and FFFF are correct?)

    3) What do you mean by default BQZ file? what can I get by programming flash and later exporting this default file?

    4) Next two lines are obtained from two different gg files. First one is the new10 gg file. The last one is an old gg file. I guess they correspond to two firmware/devices. Are both formats correct?

    "Ra Table","R_a0","R_a0 0","76","Num"

    "Ra Tables","Ra0 Table","Ra 0","104","Num"

    Regards

                 Upload_new10-report.zipUpload_new10-report.zip               

  • 0 in reply to Jean Eddim
    TI__Guru** 105770 points

    Hello Jean,

    R_a0 and R_a0x tables do not need to have the same or similar, if you just completed the learning cycle there is a good chance they are very different.

    It depends on the state of the resistance table being used and the learning cycle progress what the flags change to, you do not need to modify them this is all done by the gauge.

    From comparing the two .gg file exports you have submitted to the tool, you have worked with someone at TI previously or are using much different firmware in order to export the .gg file since there are many different parameters in each .gg file. Try using the default bqz that is in the installer on the BQ34Z100-G1 webpage, or when you download BQStudio in the Config folder of the download path.

    Sincerely,

    Wyatt Keller